How to Smugly Misunderstand Atheism 

Nah before you become an athiest you need to read 50 thousand books about every religión to absolutly make sure you have every argument for and against. Otherwise, whats the point🤣🤣

@@todbaner3385 still not my problem to care about gods nor other religions

@@thoughtsengineer yeah ik

Yeah. Like, shut the hell up my dude. I was able to free myself from religion through Skepticism but I don't need to be a skeptic to be right. Like. Who the fuck is this man to tell me what I should be.

Funny enough i know more about religion now that I'm a atheist compared to back when i was a Christian.

I like that

You beat me to it.

@@FGuilt I have no life 😔

@@vincentsolis5149 No life? This is a great community and we enjoy our engagement. This is the life!

Are animists like Shintos good atheists then? They have a whole host of supernatural beliefs but a god is not one of them.

After a lot of training, I'm up to over a thousand gods I don't believe in.

😂

@@JustOneFletch Shoot, you can manage that by just rejecting Hinduism 😂

But are you an Inner Circle Atheist?

and this is to go even further beyond! aaaahhh! atheism+!

Joker appears

Gamers rise up

So would these atheists murder or rape in a society that supported such things? If the thing organizing our behavior is society then we would be lying and stealing with no thoughts or compassion in a society that lies or steals.

@@dmwanderer9454 no my comment was pointing out the ridiculousness of his statement ("there is no super structure telling atheists how to act!") We don't have compassion because society tells us to have it. Society is just a super structure telling us how to behave (and that's all I said). We choose to listen -- based on our own subjective morality. Atheists disagree with the society they reside in all the time.

@@inefffable Ok. Id say morality, if it exists, could not be subjective. Otherwise we would kill, lie, or cheat as it suited us and not feel anything about it. People who do those things are agreed to be immoral.

He also talked down to the unscientific evangelicals. The guy is so dumb he just insulted half the religious people in the country. Because he is bashing atheist, rural America didn’t even clue in. They think bring unscientific is a badge of honour

@@xunqianbaidu6917 And, clearly, you do. Well done.

Sounds more like you just don't like having to think about what you believe in. Clearly he struck a nerve, enough for you to complain about it here.

@@gmodrules123456789 Hahaha!

Wet socks. Checkmate atheists

Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed it.

The first time I saw this guy (without context) I thought it was a prank. Then I realized the man was serious and seriously derogatory....

Oh the thing that made PoZ intro so ingenious was that he DID NOT cut the sound, showing that Brother Casey was even faking that bit, by suppressing his "grooming" making sound on the video!

This is really tough to say but I would rather have acid poured in my eyes or watch Ray Comfort videos than see this guy again!

@@ProphetofZod You need to pop your collar with more flourish. That's how you show viewers how humble you are.

There still human doesn't mean its right but Christian doesn't mean perfect

@@augustusbus5344 yeah but that’s the point. The fact that Christianity’s only excuse regarding the evils done by it’s members is “well we’re just humans too, we’re not perfect,” just shows that Christianity (as a religious institution) is nothing special. People will always be human, but some people want to suppress the ways of life of others and assert their own as the “truth.” There’s literally no reason to deny somebody healthcare on ideological grounds unless your true desire is that that person not exist. That’s the problem.

This is why I believe in secularism...

​@@augustusbus5344they're* They use their Christianity to suppress their humanity.

​@@augustusbus5344and don't equivocate "not being perfect" with "denying people basic human rights that could cost them their lives or well-being"

They're more decent than they admit when trying to make a point, or they're a sociopath on a leash.

If someone *needs* a promise of a reward and/or a threat of punishment to be a 'decent' human being, then I think such a being is not a good person but a sociopath, whose fake empathy is motivated by scare and some greed. But what is considered a _decent_ human being depends on the culture within a society and is hence not constant over space and time.

@@Apollorion Problem is that pointing out they're not decent people wouldn't do anything beneficial. Their religion is kind of centered around the idea that every human is an unredeemable monster for not devoting their entire lives, minds, and hearts to their creator. So that would agree with their ideas.

@@joshuaa7266 Presuming that your "they" refers to (fundamentalist?) abrahamic theists (i.e. Jews, Christians and/or Muslims), I would agree with your statements, but I think that most of the people from these abrahamic religions do not really *need* their religion's prospect of reward and punishment to be a decent human being, though they themselves think otherwise, just as PoZ mentioned in his comment before mine (which hadden't yet appeared to me when I typed my first comment.)

@@ProphetofZod “Sociopath on a leash” I’m really sorry but whilst this is true in some cases it commits the (Genetic fallacy) because the genetic fallacy occurs when a claim is accepted as true or false based on the origin of the belief. For example I could argue that everyone in this post is an atheist and spends hours researching evidence that confirms they’re biases because they were in reality just afraid that there will be consequences for their actions after death so it’s comforting to reinforce this belief. Many atheists openly admit that they are happier because they don’t have to worry as much any more and celebrate this new found “freedom”. Equally, you have clearly not studied the hermeneutics that enables historians, psychologists and sociologists to interpret ancient philosophical texts and bibliographies such as the Bible accurately and within they’re social, cultural and historical context and narratives. If you had studied this you would already know that for example just Johns gospel in his first letter it clearly states that…. "Whoever does not love does not know God, for God is love", and suggests that fear and love are incompatible with one another. Johns gospel also clearly states that…. “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear; for fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not reached perfection in love." Sorry but you’ve either conveniently neglected to mention this or haven’t studied the philosophy and hermeneutics behind the subject properly! This is why Barach Spinoza criticised "superstitious" forms of religious belief, which are characterised by fear, as a twisted version of the true Christian teaching found in the New Testament. The belief in the fundamental nature of mind and consciousness/theism is just a default position a (non belief) in materialism/atheism until materialists can prove that reality and existence is nothing more than “matter” not mind and consciousness. I’m not appealing to authority but according to Spinoza… “The mind of God is all the mentality that is scattered over space and time, the diffused consciousness that animates the world” (Spinoza) Equally, again I’m not making any appeals to authority but Einstein is on record as stating “I believe in the God of Spinoza.” (Einstein). “I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds.” (Albert Einstein) The problem is that the word “God” has been straw manned and anthropomorphised so much that the definition has lost meaning. Which is why Einstein denied he was an atheist but hated the word “God” “The word God is for me,” Einstein wrote, “nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness.” (Albert Einstein) Like Spinoza Einstein believes that “God” is impersonal, intangible and inexplicable. However, when Albert Einstein was asked about the historicity of Jesus he responded...“As a child I received instruction both in the Bible and in the Talmud. I am a Jew, but I am enthralled by the luminous figure of the Nazarene." Einstein was then asked if he accepted the historical existence of Jesus, to which he replied, "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life.” (Albert Einstein) According to Einstein.... “every one who is seriously engaged in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that the laws of nature manifest the existence of a spirit vastly superior to that of men, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble.” (Albert Einstein) Einstein believed in the God of Spinoza and clearly stated he was not an atheist so what does Spinoza have to say about Jesus.... Spinoza believed that Jesus was the embodiment of (truth) “The eternal wisdom of God … has shown itself forth in all things, but chiefly in the mind of man, and most of all in Jesus Christ. (Baruch Spinoza). Nevertheless, even the famous atheist philosopher Bertrand Russell echoes this sentiment regarding fear in his 1912 paper “The Essence of Religion, where he clearly agrees that "fear tends more and more to be banished by love, and in all the best worship fear is wholly absent." So you’re tarring all religious belief with this claim that it’s all because of fear is either intellectually dishonest or you are unwittingly committing the (genetic fallacy) as even Bertrand Russell points out that this is not the case among all theists. Similarly, the eminent philosopher and existentialist Kierkegaard whos book (fear and trembling) is considered a masterpiece pointed out that all human psychology has a combination of pride and fear that gets in the way of genuine integrity, empathy, altruism and love. This means that the Christian egalitarian ideal of love requires us to struggle against both pride and fear by encouraging genuine humility, courage, honour and integrity not fear and selfishness. Just a peripheral search of Kierkegaardian philosophy on the internet and you can find out all these facts about the philosophy of religion. Sorry but you have either conveniently neglected to mention this or haven’t read around the subject adequately. You don’t even need to be a theist to appreciate Kierkegaardian existentialism. “In one sense, of course, all intelligent ideas are narrow. They cannot be broader than themselves. A Christian is only restricted in the same sense that an atheist is restricted. He cannot think Christianity false and continue to be a Christian; and the atheist cannot think atheism false and continue to be an atheist. But as it happens, there is a very special sense in which materialism has more restrictions than spiritualism. . . . The Christian is quite free to believe that there is a considerable amount of settled order and inevitable development in the universe. But the materialist is not allowed to admit into his spotless machine the slightest speck of spiritualism or miracle. . . . The Christian admits that the universe is manifold and even miscellaneous, just as a sane man knows that he is complex. The sane man knows that he has a touch of the beast, a touch of the devil, a touch of the saint, a touch of the citizen. The really sane man knows that he has a touch of the madman. But the materialist’s world is quite simple and solid, just as the madman is quite sure that he is sane. The materialist is sure that history has been simply and solely a chain of causation, just as [a lunatic] is quite sure that he is simply and solely a chicken. Materialists and madmen never have doubts.” (G.k. Chesterton).

"Hmmm, smells kinda off... I wonder..." *sips* "Uggghh! ...I better make sure..." *sips more* "HRRRRRK... Still 3/4 gallon left, better keep going HRRRRRRK"

Yeah if you take it too far a spit-take stops being funny.

Straw man and fallacy of false equivalence. Religious expression is very diverse as is atheism, theism, deism and agnosticism. Some theists don’t even go to church but hundreds of atheists do! A community of hundreds of people meet in a church every Sunday in London they sing songs and listen to guest speakers. Sometimes it feels like a stand up comedy show if the speaker is in touch with every day ordinary people including the absurdity and joy of life. During the service the congregation bow their heads and contemplate the miracle of life for a few minutes. A member of the congregation gives a poignant testimony about how his mothers life and death influenced his spiritual journey. During these services they discuss the importance of wisdom, knowledge and volunteering. But this (Sunday assemblies) are no ordinary church service as they are all atheists or describe themselves as unreligious. What a brilliant idea!!. They even chat over tea and biscuits afterwards as it creates a sense of community spirit and human connectedness. I wonder where they got that idea from. ? The question is who is the mythical harmful religious Zealot the atheist or the theist sat at home watching sports on a Sunday ? This comments section is like a sketch from Monty Pythons The life of Brian!! It’s beyond ironic!! Nevertheless, according to Andrew Sims, former President of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, and Emeritus Professor of Psychiatry at the University of Leeds.... “Over the years, some 3,000 studies have compared people who have a religious belief with those who have none. They are published in The Handbook of Religion and Health, by Harold Koenig, Dana King and Verna Carson. The overriding finding is, in fact, that people with religious belief have better mental - and physical - health than those who have no faith. The fact that having a religious faith is good for you is psychiatry’s best-kept secret.” (Andrew Sims) Equally, the claim that Norway’s economic “success” can be directly correlated to its higher rate of atheism “ as in more money, better car, bigger house, high status jobs etc is a metaphysical presupposition and a fallacy. Not to mention the fact that the population is only 5 million so any surveys can not be generalised to the population of the world! Equally, if we define “successful” as having better mental and physical health including more happiness then the scientific research speaks for itself because current research demonstrates that despite Norway’s economic “success” due to its oil and well managed resources, which inevitably leads to better education and healthcare, despite these advantages Norwegians were still three times more likely to suffer from mental health problems during the Covid pandemic than other countries. So the correlation equals causation works both ways because the evidence clearly demonstrates that moderate religious expression leads to better coping mechanisms and better physical and mental health outcomes especially during times of high stress. Dostoyevsky discuses these problems with human nature in his famous novels and highlights the fact that human utopias do not lead to greater happiness. References: Webinar: Hjernen og covid-19, god hjernehelse for befolkningen etter pandemien. 26 October 2020. (The brain and COVID-19, good brain health for the population after the pandemic.) October 26, 2020. Norwegian Brain Council. S. U. Johnson, O. V Ebrahii, A. Hoffart: PTSD symptoms among health workers and public service providers during the COVID-19 outbreak. PLOS ONE, 21 October, 2020

@@georgedoyle7971 HRRRRRRK... Half gallon down. Ugggghh. Better keepHRRRRRK... Going...

@@georgedoyle7971 Seriously though, the comment here is a response to the friar suggesting that one aught read the collected works of [X,Y,Z] before dismissing the religion. Personally, I am of the mind (as I would imagine the poster of this comment would be as well) that if the core book (in this case the bible) is incapable of conveying its message by its own merits, then why should I waste my time with all of these extraneous works by authors attempting to rephrase and interpret the messages and content? I am not impressed by (and often am disgusted by) the content of the core book, so engaging in these further "mental gymnastics" would be about as useful as drinking an entire jug of expired milk just to see if it had gone bad.

In civilised country's no need to go through that crap, no trauma here about religion I realised at around 5 it was bullshit

Yeah, for sure. He strikes me as very sheltered and used to automatic deference.

@@ProphetofZod He still should be aware enough of the simple question: if his GOD could not convince a person of existing... what can HE expect to achieve?

@@Ugly_German_Truths awesome as always.

Saddest thing about all of this is that his long list of theologian clowns, and modern apologists, All Use The Same Arguments. They might change some names, examples, play a few games with their gibberish, but there is literally nothing I have seen, anywhere, that is "new". Its only new in the same sense that the latest Godzilla movie is a) maybe a bit better of a story, given all the time available to make up shit about giant lizards, and b) way more shiny, for having decades of improved technology, which can dress the whole thing up in more than a man in a rubber suit. It doesn't make the "new" Godzilla any more "real", or the utterly fake "science" behind giant, radiation spewing, lizards, is "new", but not any less fictional. Just because this clown actually thinks that a 200 year old, bad, argument for theology is "better" than some "modern" theologian can dress up the same 200 year old argument, to make it shinier and, in their deluded minds, somehow "more convincing", doesn't make either Father Con-obi's "ancient" theologians *nor* modern theologians any less absurd and incoherent. Also, when he makes a tangible contribution to ousting those TV Evangelicals, at all, in any way, then he can make comment on how their ranting nonsense is, "Not relevant".

It is kind of obnoxious isn't it? "What do I want to say to the atheists? Well, I'd better not challenge them on any specific apologetic or argument. I want to seem nice but I don't want to just tell them they're fine. So what can I challenge them on? Oh I know! I'll ask them if they read the work of obscure Renaissance theologians. That'll show em."

He does come off as though he is trying to appeal only to passive-aggressive douche bags teens or something... that beginning and patronizing follow up. Atheism means nothing except "not theist"... there is nothing "good" or "bad" about it... just like there is nothing "good" or "bad" about being "only theist, no specifics". Maybe he is only trying to appeal to passive-aggressive culturally catholic atheist teens.

@@letsomethingshine Mind that is "not theist s.l.", not "not theist s.s." , so not a theist in the broad sense of theists, so deists are not atheists.

I'm a mutated phenomenon. Just your average mutated fucked up guy! Deadpool the musical. 🦧

This feels like the best summation of this guy.

My first too. He put it well. And you put it well.

@@nicolab2075 May i suggest you check out other A-Channel? Like Belief It Or Not (at least his non-podcast-videos...), Viced Rhino, GMS, Creaky Blinder, Hbomberguy and Sir Sic?

@@nenmaster5218 Thanks! Although I was new to Zod, I'm not new to the atheist community online, my recommendations would include Cosmic Skeptic, Atheist Experience, and Logicked. I don't get on with Sir Sic, I do like Genetically Modified Skeptic. I've come across Viced Rhino on the Atheist Experience, but haven't tried his channel. I also like Trans Atlantic, if you haven't tried them. I'll give your other recommendations a go, I haven't heard of Creaky Blinder or Hbomberguy 😊👍

I'm glad you've gotten where you are now. :)

Its all good. You figured it out.

Ok. I'll forgive you if you kill a clean goat in my name.

You're truly forgiven.

@@PabloSanchez-qu6ib Lol

Yeah, it comes on pretty thick from the start.

@@ProphetofZod I'd also add that I'm not a violent person but his face looks pretty punch able.

I prefer the term 'passive-aggressive asshole'.

I don't hear that often enough...

@@ProphetofZod Thank you for expanding my vocabulary today. This one will come in handy.

Unless that group is a category of empathy

Humanists? Humanitarians?

Objective morality and extistential philosophy are still pretty new concepts in terms of the history of our species. We could either have a long way to go or get it right pretty quickly, depending on how confusing the incumbent cultures make it.

Well said!! Common sense at last in this comments section. I totally agree with you that there is a spark of the divine in all of us whether we are atheists, theists, deists, agnostics or pantheists etc. ❤️

@@georgedoyle7971 no, we’re just a social species. those qualities allow for the wellbeing and survival of the group and the individual. nothing divine is necessary.

Not enough to fill a school bus, I reckon.

Kinky lol

Ooooh. Good one. :D

Most of us are constrained by laws and by family, work, mortgages, physical/mental limitations. I don't know anyone completely free. Even if we truly want to do all that we need to do, there is bound to be more that won't fit. That's life. Choices.

you are free to have a lesser or greater narcissistic attachement if you are determined so.

He's a willing, devoted slave to his deity, so he will never truly be free. At least that's my point of view

Don't worry, in his video about confessions, he confessed that his job is to bring people closer to god. Reporting people to the police for abusing children does the opposite, and thus he'll keep those confessions to himself. Very Catholic of him. :D

I'd say he looks more like MatPat circa 2017

As have I, and not once have I see any attempt by this guy to take on board the replies provided by the people who answered his question.

That title gives this guy too much credit. I've always see him as a freakishly tall Jawa.

See: www.starwars.com/databank/obi-wan-kenobi as that may be the "Kenobi" POZ was thinking about :)

Love it

Agreed. :D

And it's not that pretty a frock, though I do like the front pleating.

@@kathryngeeslin9509 It looks rather thin, a far cry from the woollen habits we saw in Name Of The Rose for example

His narrative is somewhat 'off'. I'm starting to wonder if he really is clergy. It would not be the first time a Crisssssss Chiiiiiiin has pretended to be something they are not in order to sell their cartload of crap.

@@MatthewCaunsfield Yes. Possibly a thin layer to be worn over a t-shirt and jeans. His surroundings are modern, comfortable.

First response to Father Douchebag I saw was from Aron Ra. Most of his guests are in the category of "you gotta be effin kidding me." But they're not. Not only is this dude not trolling, but his garbage reaches thousands of gullible people every day.

Lol i thought he was trolling too.

Yeah, at first I thought the friar guy was just a parody of Christians because of how ridiculous he was

I W I S H this man was a Pscy-op that'd give me a lot more hope for humanity.

There's this twin dynamic with Christian criticism of non-theism. On the one hand they say that atheists are arrogant and don't want to be told what to do (while also not understanding how hypocritical this is) or they say that life is meaningless without a god telling them what to do. If mankind has no master, whom shall he serve?

He might have watched a few but considering the bulk of atheist debunkers addressed him odds are he's already moved on and is ignoring responses. The real purpose of these responses is for people who watch the original as a follower is to have these rebuttals show up in their feed en masse. We already have a recent deconversion in the comments, Welcome David, and hopefully these teardowns of his smug vapid presentation will be just the critical thought push some potential apostates need to stop making excuses.

@@UlshaRS “We already have a recent deconversion welcome David” Ho the irony!!

@@UlshaRS Agreed. Debates aren't for the debaters. They're for the audience. True believers won't bat an eye. But decent people will see this behavior and ponder why they're hitching their wagon to such a representative. It's all just another drop in the river that carves out the canyon.

Friar Smug closes off by claiming that we can learn something from one another. Yes, we possibly could learn something from each other. But I'll warrant that he isn't even open to listening to us. It's just a facade of congeniality over his complete disinterest in the actual point-of-view of real atheists.

MrBeast: I wanna die with an account balance of 0 and help as many people as I can Church: .....

Is it really surprising that one of the last vestiges of an empire that was intent on ruling the world doesn't really give a damn about the poor?

Check Bishop Franz-Peter Tebartz-van Elst who had to resign over his renovation of the residence for the Bishop in Limburg that in a time where the church cut all programs due to an austerity code (german catholicism is bleeding tax paying members and has for decades) and yet started at a planned 5.5 million (about half of which was meant to preserve and present important archeological finds of the medieval residence on the same place)m was announced by his office after completion to have cost just under 10 million and after a thorough audit was found to have cost 31 million, a lot of which was taken without anybody being notified out of "discretionary" accounts of the Bishopric. Turned out he needed e.g. a bathtub for 100,000 Euros... representing Christ must be a sweaty job... And that was on top of another scandal where he not only flew first class to India in 2012, but also was caught lying about it having been business due to a "level up" based on collected miles in court and was charged 20k EUR for perjury as a result. Yes, he's just ONE representative of the church, but could he have done this stuff alone? Or is he a sign of a deeper crisis inside the dying church of Rome?

Straw man arguments, myths and fallacies aren’t evidence ! I don’t even go to a Catholic Church and know that this is just stereotyping, bigotry and ignorance. What can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence! Because this quote from the brilliant linguist and cognitive scientist Noam Chomsky speaks volumes regarding your intolerance, ignorance and hubris... “I think religion has often played a very positive role. Take western civilization, the Catholic Church has played an honorable role in helping those in need. In contrast, the US carried out a virtual war against the church in central America in the 1980’s primarily because prime elements in the church were working with great courage and honor to help those in need. And to organize them to help themselves. It is more than symbolic that the decade opened with the assassination of an archbishop and ended with the murder of 6 Jesuit intellectuals, in both cases by military forces armed and trained by the US government.” (Noam Chomsky). The world isn’t as black and white a picture as you are trying to paint. No religion ever created a weapon with the potential to destroy our children and grandchildren’s future at the press of a button (Nuclear weapons) For a weapon of this monstrosity you need twentieth century secular technology and physicists/scientists who believe that morality is “arbitrary”.

@@georgedoyle7971 dude why do you copy and paste the same quote over and over and over again? Do you seriously not have any other arguments

You mean a preachy Christian hasn't addressed criticisms of his views and is not willing to consider opposing viewpoints on religious matters because he thinks he already has all the answers and is only getting into these discussions to "enlighten" others? Shocking!

No bet.

Oh I won't take that bet unless you match me. If he did watch them, he didn't listen, try for understanding, or will post an actual articulate and enlightened response. Too much? I'll show myself out.--->

I commented 10 minutes after it was posted and got nothing in return.

@@BornOnThursday Not surprising really. Most folks like him are not concerned enough to respond to actual criticism of their ideas. They'd rather ignore you and continue to preach to their choirs than confront their stupid or educate the ignorance of others. Funny, as getting out there and educating others about their beliefs are a part of their great commission.

Yeah, as I said in the description, I don't think my attitude has changed more over the course of watching a video.

By his own admission, he wants "good atheists" so he can be a "better" Christian. That means he doesn't mind our demise, for him going to heaven at our expense. Wow. As we are sooooo stupid, that we won't see through his pretend question. He reminded me of hunter Braxton and his 10 questions. What a dumpster fire 🔥.

@@ProphetofZod Actually, Zod, I think yours was one of the most blunt response I've seen. You called him right out as dishonest, as opposed to trying to work with it. Your disgust really came through.

@@flowingafterglow629 scathing atheist podcast took this dude out with lots of go f yourself.. it's absolutely beautiful.. cuz they don't worry about RU-vid taking them down.. I'm looking for the link now..

@@flowingafterglow629 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-1_BrS1HL2Z4.html. Here's the RU-vid link.

Don't worry, in his video about confessions, he confessed that his job is to bring people closer to god. Reporting people to the police for abusing children does the opposite, and thus he'll keep those confessions to himself. Very Catholic of him. :D

He will kills us without a second thought because we are non-believers

No 9ne loves you when your evil. Joking 😁

Yep, notable atheists are not mock clergy I look up to. I disagree with many of them on many things. And when one of them ends up being wrong, big deal it's their issue.

Same here from Germany. I only encountered Dawkins for the first time a few years ago. I mainly got to know him for coming up with memes.

I'm an American and I didn't get much from dawkins. I got more from seeing how the natural world simply doesn't match the biblical narrative.

True. Now i read a book of his and saw him speak several times, but growing up in (eastern ) Germany i maybe knew about his name, but thats pretty much it. If religious stuff doesnt get shoved down your throat as much as it often is the case in the us, then you have a far easier time to see nature for what it is, cause you dont constantly have to evaluate what you see or dont, vs what you are being told by people who have been told what they tell you... I dont go into the woods searching for bigfoot, cause noone made the claim there IS bigfoot.

I can't believe you think you (somehow) represent "the French atheist community". You don't know Dawkins, but you do know prophet of Zod? That's just so telling. Le Gène égoïste has been available in French for decades.

"Do you use logical fallacies to not believe in the thing I've never shown you?"

Definitely the kind of guy who's memorized the names of all the logical fallacies (probably the latin names) so he can accuse you of them baselessly when he realizes he's losing the argument.

@@ProphetofZod I may not like the behavior of Richard Dawkins in his personal life, but as an author and a scientist he certainly has contributed to the world far more than sound bites and fallacies. And far more than any priest or theologian I can imagine.

@@DoctorZisIN how is this related to the conversation?

@@johndank2209 The OP points at the irony of accusing atheists of resorting to fallacies. An example Friar Casey gives is Dawkins, and accuses him of not contributing anything to the world but soundbites and straw man arguments (fallacies). I would certainly love to hear when Dawkins uttered a straw man argument or promoted divisiveness.

May i suggest you check out other A-Channel? Like Belief It Or Not (at least his non-podcast-videos...), Viced Rhino, GMS, Creaky Blinder, Hbomberguy and Sir Sic?

Yet I doubt you disrespect them as deeply as most of them disrespect each other.

RACIST!! 😁

he's used to talking down his church members.

They don't know how to. because they have never done it before.

Is it any wonder these types can never turn their hand to such Socratic modalities as setreet epistemology? As a 55 year old man, talking like an adult to a kid who couldn't grow peach fuzz for a beard is just hard to conceptualise. He should shut up and listen to a few grown-ups and not be such a hypocrite. He reminds me of those cute videos where the 5 yo kid tries to tell off one of their parents. LOL! 😆

Religion is very diverse so Straw man arguments and (fallacy of false equivalence)!

Be honest, why would you expect a boy to talk like a grown-up?

Yeah,like 'hell'.

Nope I turned my head towards my phone so fast that I think I sprained it😂

Your new Empire?

“Empire” Materialism/atheism basically says that nobody took no time to turn nothing into everything a belief that is synonymous with the belief in magic! I don’t need secular morality to know right from wrong. Well at least be a consistent materialist/atheist! “logic is an illusion” (Nietzsche) ❤️

@@georgedoyle7971 dude... it was a prequel quote.

"if you are not with me then you are my enemy" Anakin (and jesus)

He could have picked up the robe from a Halloween costume shop for all we know. The youtube market is that easy to work.

The highest form of arrogance is being humble.

No. He's authentically smarmy. Nothing inauthentic about that.

Gah!! The watch is pissing me off with all the smugness added in smh. Vow of poverty my fkn ass!

If you zoom in you can see the label "manufactured in china"

To be fair, that condescending pr*ck clarified in the video description that he didn't mean "good _at_ being an atheist". But according to his standard, I'd bet a year's salary that he's not a "good Christian" - he'd not only need to have read all the relevant atheist literature, but also everything supporting Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Shintoism, Germanic paganism, the Roman and Greek pantheon, the Nordic pantheon, the myriad of little tribal religions all over the world, ...

Do you tolerate or ignore crazy people. 🤪 Asking for a friend.

Just watching his video would have been wasting my time, except for PoZ's response.

I kinda liked that thing he did in the beginning though where he wiped the imaginary dirt off his sleeve lol

@@pythondrink "Ugh, I got some truth on my sleeve, disgusting!"

For sure! However tall a stack we're supposedly expected to have read before we have sufficient standing to reject his beliefs, he should have to have read many times that, and he still wouldn't be justified in his beliefs. (Unless of course, one of those books contains that one elusive bit of evidence that is that slam dunk no one can counter. What are the chances of that? Hmmmm.... Most likely zero!)

Aww how quaint the “imaginary man is the sky” argument versus the belief in the fundamental nature of mind and consciousness/theism. I prefer the tooth fairy myself with Dwayne Johnson in lead role. This is a straw man argument and an ad hominem. If only you could have been around during the time of Thomas Aquinas, Anselmo d’Aosta, Augustine, Kant, Dostoyevsky, Descartes, Newton, Kepler and Spinoza you could have saved them from their misguided belief in theism with your Earth shattering “imaginary man in the sky” argument. ❤️

@@georgedoyle7971 no it's not a straw man. He believes in a God that doesn't exist. Do you even know what a straw man argument is? A strawman is a form of argument and an informal fallacy of having the impression of refuting an argument, whereas the real subject of the argument was not addressed or refuted, but instead replaced with a false one.[1] One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man". I didn't replace anything, I just changed my description of it but regardless he still believes in an imaginary magical man in the sky And it doesn't matter what time I would have lived during all those people are still in fact wrong. I mean Newton thought alchemy was a thing. So we already know one scientific fact Newton was wrong on so it's not at all inconceivable that he would have been wrong on more things such as his God belief. You are not very good at making arguments are you?

@@UlexiteTVStoneLexite Well said! Also, not only do we now have to read a stack of books, but we have to have been alive when they were written. The hurdles are getting higher!

@@tkat6442 if the Bible is God's perfect word then the only thing we need to read is the Bible. We don't need to read any other material if God's word is perfect. It doesn't need any supplementation if his word is perfect. So if I read the Bible, which I have, then I have read all the material required to know when I'm talking about. I don't know why this guy needs to add more stuff on top of God's perfect word and requires me to read those things when God's word is enough.

Thank you so much!

Agreed the lint brush was perfect 👍

@@kmarklandes8630 Lint is the work of the devil 😈

@@ProphetofZod I literally shared this video with a friend after only watching the first minute because I was cracking up so hard when you came back into frame with the lint roller!

It’d be charming when POZ did this even if he wasn’t mocking someone else.

“Religion was created when the first con man met the first fool” -Mark Twain

I wanted to be tue pope when I was young. But that's not gunna happen. Because I'm a girl.

The reasons might vary by person depending on their previous exposure to the faith, but it definitely doesn't push you in a good direction.

@@shadowpuppet8192 Lady Pope sounds like an amazing 1970's style sexploitation action movie. "Hail Mary, full of kicking ass! Evil doers beware, because under Lady Pope's robes there's nothing but a lean, mean, inquisition machine!"

I don't think it takes any more than making a person into a theist. Every theist has a bit of that craving.

Blasphemer! How dare you treat Atheismo as though he might be real?! As penance, I demand you eat an entire portion of pasta. AND LIKE IT!

@@FoxyRaccoon84 I am a pastaferian so that's hardly a penance!

@@FoxyRaccoon84 man I love pasta, if eating pasta was the only requirement for forgiveness from sins then I'd still be religious for sure

Thanks! I really appreciate that.

Especially with the supremely superior ones who brag about their humility. I know quiet respectful discussion for the most part is most effective with them and any audience, but I find being "nice" to their condescension near impossible for any part. And accurate mimicry gets the reaction I'd like to give. You have my greatest respect.

@@kathryngeeslin9509 Thanks Kathryn!

It isn't his, like everything else is belongs to the church and is loaned to him. Also it appears to be a Fitbit, are you against the clergy exercising?

@@GinEric84 so you don't know the origin and function of the garb? As you missed the important bits. Wether it's a watch or fitbit, it's still vanity.

@@sfamerken12 no, both watches and fitbits are items of utility. The dude isn't wearing a fucking Rolex, chill your tits.

@@GinEric84 alright, stay ignorant then.

Hey Eric, did you ever tell your child (who hasn't taken a vow of poverty) to remove those posters? Flashback humor.

Welcome to atheism. I had a similar first response to this video as you. Perhaps I've gotten inured to the smarmy self righteous presentation from some apologists. I tried to give it as much charity as possible and considered it to be asking atheists to try and keep discussions intelligent and useful. And trying to improve the quality of discourse at least sounds very admirable. But on closer inspection he defined good in ways that smuggled in his goals, to imply we need to behave in accordance to his goals, or be labeled bad. As to whether he honestly wants atheists to be better at promoting atheistic ideas, I'm skeptical at the least. As for the moral aspects, I'd like to hope that for simple empathetic reasons, he wouldn't wish people to be bad. I have heard of cases of Christians specifically wishing for more suffering in the world, to empower their religion more. But I don't like to accuse people of that level of ugliness without evidence. The implication, or outright statement from apologists, that atheists have no foundation for morality is just silly. Biblical morality is a layer added onto our more general social morality. Not the other way around. Just because the bible claims to provide some moral lessons, doesn't mean people can't figure out morals without it. In fact many biblical moral lessons are directly based on extrabiblical sources.

Hey fellow apostate! Congrats on escaping the most popular cult in history. Your points are spot on.

@Christa Simon I couldn't say it was one or two things that pushed me away. For as long as I can remember, I've been asking questions of many things. My brother became an atheist several years ago and it really started my doubting of Christianity. I still believed, but I was always doubting/asking questions and nobody could give me answers that were satisfying. I continued to believe because almost everyone around me did and I wasn't supposed to look for answers outside of Christian sources/the bible. I had lots of depression and anxiety/self hate for years. I felt like I didn't belong fully and like something was wrong with me. People told me it was my sin or the devil that caused it. I couldn't let my questions go. I recently started watching a few atheist RU-vidrs and they showed me that atheists weren't what I had been taught. It opened me up to listening. Their answers were much more satisfying and made more sense. I had a couple times leaving my faith where I wept or screamed loudly in frustration because 1) I was terrified of what others (mostly family) thought and 2) I realized I spent so much time in this thing I no longer believed in. I don't have depression or much anxiety anymore. I don't hate myself anymore. I do feel a weird desire for a god. I sometimes catch myself saying "thank God" or asking God for protection, but then I'm like "God isn't there." I think it's just because it's still a bit ingrained in me. Anyways, this is a long response, but I've never liked giving short answers that much.

@Christa Simon P.S. If there are any other questions, I am fine with answering.

Welcome. It's nice to be free hey❤️

How to become social path?😁😄😃🦤

He’s the poster child for “this is your brain on religion”. It’s amazing how often he accuses the other side of logical fallacies like appeal to authority when it’s his side that pretty much wrote the book on that. Also the lack of self awareness is strong in this one because if he had any he’d at least adjust his tone in the video before posting,

Naw getting torn up by critical responses hurts his feelings, and thus reminds him that he did a good thing by putting himself in this situation. He suffers for his beliefs! He suffers that some of us may be saved by his message! Suffering means he is good!

@@tetsujin_144 can’t say he doesn’t deserve the suffering for his willful ignorance. Hopefully it prompts him to examine the cause he’s suffering for

Reminds me of a quote I just heard, from idk who, "to all you fundamentalist christians: I don't think you realize, spending eternity with people like you isn't the selling point you think it is!"

@@tkat6442 100 upvotes - I think the Rev James Dobson got Jeffrey Dahmer a ticket into heaven.

Yes. When people try to talk down to Dawkins who had revolutionized his scientific field before age 30 and literally invented the meme. The father of memes. The man will be appearing on British Pound notes some day.

Also the Richard Dawkins foundation which helps abused women and gays to safely escape Radical islamic Theocracies.

He literally has come out and said “one day we will regard meat eaters the same way we view slave owners today” And people respond “wow okay boomer. What a racist hypocrite” I think woke leftists are honestly extremely susceptible to conformity and allowed Christian hate of Dawkins to color their perception, not understanding what he means when he says Muslims are the primary victims of Islam. Because honestly reactionary brain smol.

The Vegans especially virulently hate Dawkins. Then there are breadtube wannabe Christcuck secret agents on RU-vid like Kavernacle who fallaciously try to denounce new atheism based solely on the fact that pseudo intellectuals and historical revisionists like Sargon of Akkad and BlackPigeonSpeaks built their audience by appealing to politically incorrect Skeptics before taking a hard right turn into fascist apologia.

@@isidoreaerys8745 *humans* are extremely susceptible to conformity Yeah. The main reason to be aware of cognitive biases and such is to try and compensate for them in yourself. After all, the scientific method is ultimately trying to prove *yourself* wrong

Pie Jesu domine, dona eis requiem! ***thonk***

Accept for John Cleese insisted it was just meant as harmless fun and comedy not to demonise moderate religious expression unlike this comments section.

@@georgedoyle7971 bwahahhaahahahaha oh you just keep giving the comic relief!

At this point, I wouldn’t be shocked if that was the real motivation behind making the video.

Did Fryer or steamer Tuck do a video in reply to St AronRa? Link please; thanks. Zoddy's is the best so far.

@@VaughanMcCue No. Its pretty obvious by now Friar Schmuck is only interested in talking at atheists, not to atheists. Also, I think Aron Ra would actually be offended by being called a saint. :-) FYI, in your reply you left out the at symbol followed by my name, so I got no notification of your reply. If I hadn't of happened to glance back at this video, I'd never have known you replied. Addendum: Huh. I did get a notification after all. It just took a while. Weird. Whatever then. Ignore my FYI comment.

@@Jay_Scott_Raymond Oops, sorry, But for the luck of one of the gods - I never thought to ensure @ is present. Thanks. St AronRa. I canonised him a while ago, so it is all clear. By the power vested in me by ... um, it is Friday; Odin's wife, *Freya.* It is hard work keeping up my devotions when I don't know what day it is. Depending on your geographical location, by the time you read this, it might be Saturnalia passing out blessings. I think being an atheist would take less time, but I am sure one of the gods or goddesses is real, so I am placing Pascal's wagers on all of them.

If he had some good tips for playing GTA he'd have done better.

Love it 😀

And wtf is this "in the past" garbage? the Catholic church is still committing atrocities today. Then there's the fact that they still have all the wealth they have stolen from the nations whose kids they are still diddling.

To this I ask: "Your faith has given us all the answers to the human condition, and yet, time and time again, every time you attempt to act upon your faith, the volume of human suffering increases many times, either when people 'perverted' your faith for their own ends, or sincerely believe in the virtue of their deeds as they did great harm. Pray tell me, what does all this imply, even taking into account the fallen nature of man as you so often liked to speak of?"

For him a fallacy means any argument that challenges what he believes but that he can't think of a rebuttal for.

I am not so sure. Catholic apologetics have had a long time to get sophisticated and like it or not, there are some very bright Catholic philosophers.

Christian phylosophy/theology was far more impressive before modern scene began filling the gaps of our knowledge and dismantle Biblical "facts".

But if the gold doesn't last forever, what good does it do?

If you want to be certain to get a permanent pot of gold, you could always just try and catch the Pope.

@@ProphetofZod 🤣

@@ProphetofZod Aww how quaint the “Leprechaun” argument versus the belief in the fundamental nature of mind and consciousness/theism. I prefer the tooth fairy myself with Dwayne Johnson in lead role. This is a straw man argument and an ad hominem. If only you pseudo philosophers could have been around during the time of Thomas Aquinas, Anselmo d’Aosta, Augustine, Kant, Dostoyevsky, Descartes and Spinoza you could have saved them from their misguided belief in theism with the Earth shattering “Leprechaun” argument. Come on Prophet of Zod you can do better. According to W.Quine no ontological claim can be verified. As I pointed out already this is comedy gold for anyone with a basic grounding in modal logic and analytical philosophy. This is better than watching Monty Pythons (The life of Brian). ❤️

@@georgedoyle7971 yes you are hilarious and indeed comedy gold. Your crap spout fills me with mirth.

Beautiful description glorified tribal shamans

Yeah, I would hope so. I'd be curious to see what he'd say in an actual conversation with informed feedback.

Thanks! And that's a perfect name for him. Just don't be mistaken for calling him "Father McHotty."

@@ProphetofZod he could be a hottie, if he wasn't so slimely condescending

@@winterchild6120 Totally agree. He's attractive, then just has to open his mouth and let all that nonsense fall out.

@@JRAndrach yup, if only he could keep his mouth shut, he would be a lot more agreeable

No mention of Schopenhauer?^^

@@ColinWrubleski-eq5sh I like Schopenhauer

Fake _Fanciscian_ monk ... sporting what looks like an Apple iWatch. The Franciscian order took a vow of poverty. Just say'n ...

Apparently he accused Aron Ra of making a straw man out of him though I fail to see how Aron did. Videos like this are meant to ‘preach to the choir’ (so to speak) and only serve to make theists feel superior to atheists I suspect. His tone is way too smarmy for the video to be made in good faith.

I wonder if he takes sugar on his porridge.

In my decades of experience with clergy from many denominations, I've seen that their expectation is always for a free ride. They expect deference in conversation and they expect someone else to pay their tabs.

Not sure that makes you a bad atheist, but it sure makes you a polite one!

If you want to be a good atheist do it the german way and say Gesundheit (Health in english)

I've wondered about this as well. If a supernatural phenomena manifested in nature it would, by definition, become part of the natural world. Wouldn't it?

Yeah, this is a great point. If a being anywhere close to that existed, we would be unable to fully or even nearly comprehend it. Yet the vastness of it is used as an excuse to say specific things about it, including about its personality and how we should react to it. It's nonsense.

@@ProphetofZod exactly

What you've described is something unfalsifiable. And yes, that WOULD make a supernatural thing inherently impossible to prove

@@metademetra actually, I described something unverifiable But it’s also unfalsifiable, because there’s no limit to the ad hoc excuses they can pull out of a hat